U2,s current incarnation as a pop band!

[Earnie Shavers]

Well, to be honest I'm way behind on them and only heard the album for the first time over the weekend. I think it's great and it's definitely a shot fired from U2's traditional turf, so used it as an example. I'm getting hold of a copy this week and I'll have a proper listen alone and see what I think...

 

[U2girl]

There I was thinking a single breaking download records and almost doubling sales of your previous album was a good and succesful song that connected well with the younger audiences.

Good thing we have experts here.

(the first single-best song on the album thing only happened on their first 4 albums)

 

[bread n' whine]

I disagree. Maybe it's not always the very best song, but U2's run of first singles until "Vertigo" is brilliant, and their run of album openers is even better-- probably the best for any band, ever. U2 had a way of making you believe you wre listening to the best album ever with their opening tracks, no matter how spotty the rest was. They hit you instantly, they don't get old with repeat listens, and they define the character of the record, or the character the record would have had if it had been as good as the opening track. October is a possible exception, but every other proper album from Boy to ATYCLB fits what I'm saying.

If someone asked me my favorite U2 songs, sure there are a few others, but mostly I think of all the first songs.

 

[Earnie Shavers]

I'm not really sure what I would have done if I were the guy who made the decision on what to release as the first single from Atomic Bomb. On the one hand, of course, if I were a Universal Music marketing executive and only had my eyes on the dollars, there's no way I'd go past Vertigo. There's no doubt that's going to be the highest charting, highest selling single on the album. There's no doubt it's going to rope in the kids who otherwise would consider U2 an 'old' band. There's no doubt it's going to be all over the radio - it's perfect for mainstream FM pop-rock radio. It's a wet dream for those looking to make a buck off that album. Vertigo all the way! Bring on the Christmas bonus!

If I were to do what is my personal favourite plan of attack as a U2 fan, it's in the way The Fly and Numb were the first singles off Achtung and Zooropa. I would have released Mofo as the first Pop single as well. Punch them square in the face. Like it? Grab the album because you'll love the rest. Don't like it? Fuck off then. Problem with that is I'm not sure that there's a song on the Bomb that adequately does that because it's such a mish mash of an album. Maybe Miracle Drug sets up the expectation the best, but that thing as a single would sink like a stone, only splashing around briefly under the support of hungry U2 fans desperate to get their hands on new U2 regardless of what it is. It certainly isn't a punch in the face and it certainly wouldn't be breaking download records, charting or getting mammoth airplay.

I think if I were to find the middle ground, used some smarts, I would have been a bastard and tricked a large % of the U2 fanbase. People forget that while U2 probably did lose a large % of their 80's fan base during the 90's, and then won them back with ATYCLB, that album (ATYCLB) also left millions of fans who came onboard during the 90's out in the cold. Expectation was high that the Bomb would be a middle ground and bring balance back to the force. Many, many, many people I know were licking their lips in anticipation that U2 would be 'back' with this album, that ATYCLB was a necessary step to make good with a segment of their fanbase, and now on with the show. Not so, the Phantom Menace was followed up with Attack of the Clones and absolutely no-one else I know bought it, despite many of them adoring 80's AND 90's U2. Vertigo put them off in a big way. Me playing the rest of the album for them confirmed it. They do however love one track, and it's a common thing I've found, and that track is Love And Peace or Else. I wouldn't have released that as a formal single. I would have snuck it out there as a download, a preview. It would have fooled a lot of people. THEN I'd hit the FM radio masses with Vertigo. Love and Peace would be played around on the kind of radio stations that used to play U2, but wouldn't touch a song like Elevation or Walk On or Vertigo or Sometimes with a 40 foot pole. "U2 are back!" they would cry. Vertigo would have a slightly different meaning to them when it's released, commercial yes, but have you heard Love and Peace? The album might be great!

 

[lmjhitman]

the Phantom Menace was followed up with Attack of the Clones and absolutely no-one else I know bought it

brilliant analogy, earnie.

 

[Earnie Shavers]

The comparison between the original Star Wars trilogy and the original 9 U2 albums, and the 'new' Star Wars trilogy and U2's last two albums is great and a near perfect analogy to me. But it's not mine. I stole it off the Radiohead message board.

 

[bread n' whine]

Everything they've done since 1991 (if not always) has been so calculated, especially the latest reinvention as a pop band. That's what disturbs me. I can deal with calculated experimentation (Passengers), and calculated simplicity ("In a Little While"). I can deal with calculated populism ("Beautiful Day"). I can't deal with calculated letsjustsellafuckloadwiththispanderingmeaninglesssongism-- even if as some have suggested, there are personal reasons why Bono needed to turn away from writing lyrics like those on Pop.

In my view what U2 has done in the pop realm with HTDAAB is no different from what the industry as a whole churns out. In fact it's much worse because, having tried other things in the past, they know exactly what they are doing.

To talk like Bono for a sec, it's a deal with the devil. Keep U2 around as a commercial vehicle so you can sell enough albums and tour tickets to continue your ultra-comfortable existence and provide for your kids' future, at the same time keeping your name around so you have the influence (and money!) needed to push the issues you care about with world leaders who will have only heard of the biggest most mainstream star (didn't notice the Geldof exception I guess-- has George W. ever heard of Boomtown Rats?), and just occasionally put something meaningful into a song if you need to get it off your chest and not feel too shameful for writing meaningless music... but don't get too bothered about doing that, cause it's only rock n roll and after all not music for 45 year olds and after all even the best of it doesnt mean much of anything to me now that I've got to this age, does it, and the greater good I can do for the world is not going to be in music, it would be selfish to still see myself as an artist and please the niche audience which can actually deal with challenge and is mostly composed of elitists and wankers (being so exposed to rock criticism it's not surprising he thinks this) and make myself feel like a creative person above God when I can instead be a businessman/politician/pop star/selfless denier of my own decadent, pointless artistic muse all in one.

Giving him the most possible credit, that is his thinking.

The day I read how a song called "Native Son" became a song called "Vertigo," in an interview with an affable sounding band who didn't seem to realize they'd just written their own death wish... if I had ever considered myself more than a casual U2 fan, I would have cried. If I had been one of you guys with thousands of posts, I would have felt like slitting my wrists.

It took months before I could allow myself to listen to anything by U2 again or admit they had ever been good. I never even considered buying How to Dismantle an Atomic Bomb after that, though I hadn't heard it yet. Only two things: realizing what a clueless ponce Chris Martin is for a new Bono, and at the same time glancing through Bono's book this spring out of curiosity and realizing whatever he's thinking, and however wrong it is, it still springs from good intentions, from the mind of someone who is interesting, and different, and someone I would actually want to be like (and in some ways seemingly more thoughtful than anything he's ever put into his MUSIC), only that has allowed me to come here and dignify a non-album like HTDAAB with debate. I never rated Bono before. I tried to ignore him.

But, nearly everyone who makes shitty pop music has their reasons. The more intelligent they are, the more these reasons ring hollow. One thing I learned from that book is Bono is much more intelligent than most of the people who people think of as more intelligent than him. He and they know what they are doing, and they've gone from thinking they can have it both ways in one sense that may have been morally suspect but created some artistic brilliance, to thinking they can have it both ways in another sense that may help the world a little more (that excuse rings hollow too-- remember the Geldof thing) but is equally morally suspect, and can result in only bad music. So much for "maturing."

 

[Earnie Shavers]

That all rings very true. My knee jerk reaction as someone who has followed the band closely and passionately for 14 years is that they haven't sold their souls to quite the level you describe, but do believe in what they are doing in a very genuine way. And that may well be worse. I guess I haven't fully made my mind up. I know there's a chance they believe in it, and have a plan with it, that they want to add music to populist mainstream radio, MTV etc, that, while on a U2 scale lacks all depth and soul, on a pop scale has quite a lot of it (certainly far more depth then your average Gwen Steffani, Rob Thomas et al). In that sense it just means they've gone to a place I don't give a flying fuck about and that they've made a significant error in judgement as well by playing up to a market that will never truly give a fuck that lasts any longer than one of their songs lasts in the charts. Or, maybe you are right and it's a premeditated sell out and any pre-this era U2 fan is getting royaly shafted. Any fan that came on board because of or post this album is simply just that, a new fan, and a fan of this music and this band that produced this music, and thats a different thing all together as I really can't justify that this band who produced this music is really even the same band as that band that produced that music. I can't deny that there are those in here and outside of here who do genuinely believe in it though, and good for them I guess.

I think that the Bomb shocked me more than anything else. I've listened to it, been shattered at it's shallowness and put it back on the shelf for a couple of months a few times now. It doesn't change. I think it gets worse. I can't make it past the halfway point of most of the songs anymore from a combination of simple boredom brought on by such dull premeditated corporate pop music, and sadness and almost anger that it's come from such a great, great creative band. For me it all hangs on what comes next. It will say and mean a lot and answer a lot of the questions I throw around here, ones that I really want to ask Bono at 4am when he's had too much to drink and maybe throws out an honest answer.

You're right, the guy is very, very intelligent. Very, very aware as well. We'll see. I hope they just took a wrong turn, but one with good intentions, and that it's adjusted. If it's The Bomb Part II, U2 really are dead in the water.

 

[Axver]

Ooops, didn't realised I'd signed onto the anti-U2 board. My mistake. I'll now go blow my brains out for thinking that (possibly excepting Vertigo) HTDAAB contains meaningful, intelligent song after meaningful, intelligent song. I clearly was stupid for thinking LAPOE and Crumbs are two of the best political songs U2 have ever made. I don't know what I was thinking when I thought COBL was a perfect mix of epic and anthemic rock with soul and heart. And I must've been totally delusional when I thought U2 were comfortable with themselves and making the music they want to make. Thank you all for opening my eyes. U2 are a pack of conniving sell-outs, even if they don't realise it. Oh, and their setlists suck, the tour is Elevation Part II, and U2 are becoming like the Rolling Stones.

 

[liamcool]

*pats you on the back* You need to chill out and listen to every Passengers song in a row.

 

[liamcool]

Oh, before I forget, when your dead, can I chop your arm off, cover it in icecream and chocolate topping, and eat it?

 

[Aardvark747]

Oh, before I forget, when your dead, can I chop your arm off, cover it in icecream and chocolate topping, and eat it?

"Tis but a scratch!"

"A scratch?! Your arms off!!"

"No it isn't"

"Well what's that then?"

"........just a flesh wound - COME ON YA PANSEY!!!"



Sorry....couldnt resist!

 

[Axver]

Oh, before I forget, when your dead, can I chop your arm off, cover it in icecream and chocolate topping, and eat it?

That arm is going to science!

 

[liamcool]

What about a leg? Legs taste good. I ate some guy who liked Pride a little bit too much once.

 

[bread n' whine]

Have you read Bono's extended interview with Greg Kot of the Chicago Tribune (or is it Sun-Times...)? Anyway, you need to read it, as does anyone here. It, along with his book, is pretty much the only reason I am giving nu-U2 the benefit of the doubt as to intentions.

And I am doing that. Compared to most of the theories that get floated, my (over)analysis is very flattering. I'm not necessarily saying it's a premeditated sellout in the traditional sense that word is used. I think there are a lot of complex motives working together to lead him down this path. I am not saying the direct motive is primarily money, or greater fame. If it plays any part, that part is probably pushed into the subconscious, or he has convinced himself the selfish component of wanting more is less than the philanthropic component-- i.e. using it to change the world for the good, or for his kids (the common celebrity excuse).

Even if they were completely selfish dicks, they are such a big band there are easier ways to cash in after a long career than getting together from the four corners of the world and recording a new album. That's why it took four years. And in terms of fame, where was there to go really, from ATYCLB? It seems, up. But up a pretty tiny amount. He was already in the stratosphere. Now he's feeling the "vertigo," get it? get it? His stardom may actually be at the point where it's going to work against him commercially from here on out.

So from all I've read, it's not fame and money. Either he is honest, or he would have had to invent such a brilliantly honest seeming persona for himself in interviews and in his book that I wouldnt care if his motive was just money, he'd be such a master con artist. I'm saying "he." I have no idea about the other guys' personality or motives these days or ever, I've read basically zero pre-Bomb interviews, if anyone can point me to some of the classic ones I would be really grateful. In fact I only recently learned to match Larry Mullen and Adam Clayton's names to the faces. Perhaps they (and Edge) are just doing it for the money and they got Bono along for the ride for his other reasons. Do they share the money equally four ways like REM did? If not I could see they have more justification for being greedy, and he might be more vulnerable to their entreaties. But no one is likely to have admitted their desire out loud. Would the Bono of "Conversations" want to continue hanging with such guys? I don't think so.

The "Native Son" interview seemed at the time an example of pure sellout, which was why it was painful. I had never been the biggest U2 fan. I got into them later than other bands. I just didnt pay attention to music through the '90s, and by the time I did U2 was U2 and I kind of avoided them for awhile. But I had gradually been getting the old albums since ATYCLB, and was increasingly impressed. They still are not MY band and will never be. They are one of many favorites but it's a slightly less personal relationship. That's fine.

Anyway, that interview hurt me because I always made an effort to defend U2 from the most nonsensical criticisms. And that was all those criticisms, seemingly true and admitted straight out. Looking back on it, it isn't necessarily what it seemed like. It fits the picture of a man who no longer has the same idea of what art is or should be, as he once did.

There's a reason even indie rockers don't talk much about sellout these days, with the OC and Modest Mouse and all. It's not a meaningful term. I think maybe hip-hop did that, and our microknowledge of celebrities lives, to the point we are realizing much of what we used to think was fake about them is actually, painfully real, no matter how shallow. There is bad music with good reasons for doing it and good music with bad reasons for doing it. Money plays a hidden part in everything. People have realized all you can rely on is the music itself. I don't think HTDAAB is as bad as Rob Thomas, but it's worse than many things U2 fans would consider disposable. It's not bad because it's a sellout, it's bad because it sounds like a sellout. The sound of the music is all I can be sure about.

 

[liamcool]

Would we all agree to stop arguing if I posted a random MP3 or two from my collection?

 

[Lila64]

"Tis but a scratch!"

"A scratch?! Your arms off!!"

"No it isn't"

"Well what's that then?"

"........just a flesh wound - COME ON YA PANSEY!!!"



Sorry....couldnt resist!

It's just a flesh wound - brilliant





by the way, I think the parrot is just sleeping...

 

[bread n' whine]

I have to say you guys on this board are awesome. I had intentionally limited discussion with real life hardcore U2 fans before posting here because I was never that passionate about the band and detested the new stuff, but some of you are harder on them than I am, and you all seem pretty rational about it. Maybe the increased fame and influx of a new type of fan has turned you off more than us innocent bystanders. I figured most of you guys would defend Bomb (not to mention ATYCLB which I actually think is pretty enjoyable and brilliant on occasion) to the death, as it is at least a technically competent mass produced pop/rock album, the kind of thing where, if someone likes the atrocious basic style, it's hard to find faults in. Unlike say, the shoddy and unsatisfying-from-any-standpoint Around the Sun, which still manages to get defended to the death on the REM board I post at.

But you guys don't see with blinders, even the people that like the past two albums. The blinders are more in thinking Achtung Baby is the most brilliant genius work of mankind ever. But it is pretty brilliant and U2's best, and a nice surprise that track 2 on The Joshua Tree and Unforgettable Fire arent your favorite U2 moments, so you can be forgiven.

 

[Earnie Shavers]

Have you read Bono's extended interview with Greg Kot of the Chicago Tribune (or is it Sun-Times...)? Anyway, you need to read it, as does anyone here. It, along with his book, is pretty much the only reason I am giving nu-U2 the benefit of the doubt as to intentions.

Yes, and if you dig maybe a month or two back in these pages (or the "Where The Album Has A Name" sub forum, can't remember) you'll find a mammoth thread on that interview. In fact, I think it was that interview that sparked a whole new round of HTDAAB "discussion".

So from all I've read, it's not fame and money. Either he is honest, or he would have had to invent such a brilliantly honest seeming persona for himself in interviews and in his book that I wouldnt care if his motive was just money, he'd be such a master con artist. I'm saying "he." I have no idea about the other guys' personality or motives these days or ever, I've read basically zero pre-Bomb interviews, if anyone can point me to some of the classic ones I would be really grateful. In fact I only recently learned to match Larry Mullen and Adam Clayton's names to the faces. Perhaps they (and Edge) are just doing it for the money and they got Bono along for the ride for his other reasons. Do they share the money equally four ways like REM did? If not I could see they have more justification for being greedy, and he might be more vulnerable to their entreaties. But no one is likely to have admitted their desire out loud. Would the Bono of "Conversations" want to continue hanging with such guys? I don't think so.

I think, or at least they used to, split it all equally 5 ways. The 4 band members and their manager. I don't know if that's changed, or if that is the split for everything U2 that makes money, but it was the plan for a long time there at least.

Personality wise, Bono and The Edge have long had the reputations of having their musical heads in the clouds, and it's thought that pretty much all of their left of centre stuff comes from there, the creative push, the artistic push (traditionaly). Adam I guess is seen as somewhere in the middle. Then at the other end Larry is seen as the very conservative end of the spectrum. You read interviews with them all about things like Pop and Passengers, and while Bono and The Edge will admit to faults on Pop, they'll still defend it to the death. Larry meanwhile will happily say that he thought it was all bullshit and he hates both albums, and he seems to want to forget that the 90's existed at all. From an interview/article it was revealed that U2 had an album ready to go almost a year before The Bomb actually surfaced, but Larry effectively trashed it by saying he wouldn't take that record on the road, it needed more 'hits'. A new production team, a new direction and yet another overhaul took place. I would love to have been in the room at that moment in time to knock Larry out before he had a chance to say that. The above are of course stereotypes, and who really knows who makes what call, but I suspect Larry is what keeps them simple, and Bono is who needs the 'mass populist' the most.

Anyway, that interview hurt me because I always made an effort to defend U2 from the most nonsensical criticisms. And that was all those criticisms, seemingly true and admitted straight out. Looking back on it, it isn't necessarily what it seemed like. It fits the picture of a man who no longer has the same idea of what art is or should be, as he once did.

I've fought every fight defending U2. I have essentialy two main groups of friends who are quite different in lives and music. One is a group of strictly music people, which comes from my work background. They are producers (one of note here in Australia), music writers, record company employees. They know their shit when it comes to music. The other are the old high school friends. Accountants. Sales reps. From the suburbs and get their musical tips and tastes from the radio and aren't that fussed. I've spent many a drunken hour fighting both over U2. And it's surprising how similar the arguments against U2 will come from both groups, just one has a lesser musical/intellectual/knowledgable background than the other. Honestly, I can't do it with the Bomb. I agree with too much of their case against.

 

[bread n' whine]

I'm surprised that "of-note" record producers and record company employees would criticize HTDAAB. It seems to have been an of-note producer bonanza and the type of album a record company loves. I don't think it's actually a poorly produced record for what it's trying to be. The most mainstream pop/rock tends to be produced that way. People do have a point when they say mainstream hip-hop is always fresher, at least if you're talking about the sound rather than the songwriting.

Do most producers who work on the poppiest most throwaway music (not talking Bomb here necessarily!) actually enjoy that music, or come to appreciate it? Or do they harbor a resentment against it and wish they could be working on the great bands that usually set their own course without the producer's input, or operate too far under the radar for their paths to cross?

I'll look for the old thread maybe... except search is down. Any older interviews you recommend, like Achtung or Zooropa or Passengers or Pop era? ATYCLB era interviews would be interesting just to know if they had a similar philosophy when making that one, or if the current "sell-osophy" developed more in response to that one's popularity.

 

[U2girl]

Ooops, didn't realised I'd signed onto the anti-U2 board. My mistake. I'll now go blow my brains out for thinking that (possibly excepting Vertigo) HTDAAB contains meaningful, intelligent song after meaningful, intelligent song. I clearly was stupid for thinking LAPOE and Crumbs are two of the best political songs U2 have ever made. I don't know what I was thinking when I thought COBL was a perfect mix of epic and anthemic rock with soul and heart. And I must've been totally delusional when I thought U2 were comfortable with themselves and making the music they want to make. Thank you all for opening my eyes. U2 are a pack of conniving sell-outs, even if they don't realise it. Oh, and their setlists suck, the tour is Elevation Part II, and U2 are becoming like the Rolling Stones.

Careful now, you'll soon get the "blind follower" and "sheep" label thrown in your face.

 

[bathiu]

yeah... add some fuel to the fire... troll here and there... throw a bait for further fights in case the thread is dying...

You're (well, actualy NOT) full of surprises U2girl

...and don't worry about Axver, those honorable titles are reserved for very few people on this forum... yes, including you.

 

[gherman]

Some people have way too much fucking time on thier hands. They just keep writting the same thread over and over and over and over and over and over................

 

[wild honey 7]

Some people have way too much fucking time on thier hands. They just keep writting the same thread over and over and over and over and over and over................

how true

 

[yimou]

"Tis but a scratch!"

"A scratch?! Your arms off!!"

"No it isn't"

"Well what's that then?"

"........just a flesh wound - COME ON YA PANSEY!!!"

Sorry....couldnt resist!

And i am sorry too,, Aardvarks wonderful post deserved this photo.

 

[Earnie Shavers]

I'm surprised that "of-note" record producers and record company employees would criticize HTDAAB. It seems to have been an of-note producer bonanza and the type of album a record company loves. I don't think it's actually a poorly produced record for what it's trying to be. The most mainstream pop/rock tends to be produced that way. People do have a point when they say mainstream hip-hop is always fresher, at least if you're talking about the sound rather than the songwriting.

Do most producers who work on the poppiest most throwaway music (not talking Bomb here necessarily!) actually enjoy that music, or come to appreciate it? Or do they harbor a resentment against it and wish they could be working on the great bands that usually set their own course without the producer's input, or operate too far under the radar for their paths to cross?

No, they can. I mean the record company employees aren't going to sit there and act like the stereotypical cold hearted record company guy and only hear brilliance in the sound of a cash register binging open - as a former record company employee I find that offensive! (not really) - they are massive music fans first and foremost, have cd collections in the thousands, attending gigs small and large a couple of times a week at least, and know U2's work intimitely. The producer has done a mix of commercial and not so. From a couple of the best true raw rock bands in this country through to a band that while technicaly 'rock' were really nothing more than a boy band and produced sweetly so. Quite a range in between actually across styles and sound. But again he's commenting from the position of an extremely knowledgable music fan, not a producer, although having said that he was disappointed with the production in parts from a technical viewpoint. As for what producers acknowledge as good or bad or appreciate or whatever, I've found it's all completely wide open. This guys personal musical tastes skew heavily towards more 'underground rock', but he'll often be caught listening closely to the poppiest of teeny bopper pop and point something random out from it as a good thing, or difficult, or whatever. I think there's the art and then there's the trade and he can judge them differently. I'm sure they all dream of having their names on an OK Computer, but can still respect an outstanding job done on a Britney song, and even more closer to the truth, will work on virtually anything if it pays well.

Anyway, it's interesting hearing a bunch of different viewpoints. From the hardcore dedicated fans in here, to the casual but very interested such as yourself, to the very casual ear of some of my friends, to the very trained and experienced ears of some of my other friends.

I'll look for the old thread maybe... except search is down. Any older interviews you recommend, like Achtung or Zooropa or Passengers or Pop era? ATYCLB era interviews would be interesting just to know if they had a similar philosophy when making that one, or if the current "sell-osophy" developed more in response to that one's popularity.

I don't know about great individual interviews, there are lots, but it's pretty hit and miss. But if you have the time and can be bothered getting hold of it, the below linked book is outstanding. Even for a non-U2 fan I think it would be a very good and interesting read. The writer spent several years with the band, pretty much non-stop, access all areas. The story starts with the recording of Achtung Baby, goes through it's release and tour, then the recording of Zooropa, it's release and the continuation of the Zoo TV tour, then comes to an end as they are beginning their work on Passengers. So, it has amazing insights into those albums and that period of change and overhaul, but it's just the day to day stuff on the road with the band, the 3am drunken conversations with Bono in some random city about life, love, the band, music, art etc that really make it a great read. I think everyone in these boards would agree that this book is the singular best insight into the band, their music and way of thinking and living out of every interview or anything published ever.

http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/t...f=sr_1_6/002-5571737-4879210?v=glance&s=books

 

[2Hearts]

At every point along the way, there have been those (including myself at times) who just weren't sure where the band was headed, and if they had lost their magic.

U2 is alive and well in 2005, IMO.

 

[U2girl]

Regarding all the "Larry stopped it" whining, I seem to recall an Adam quote how he thought they should have more hits to get in new fans on the Bomb, as opposed to only Beautiful day in 2000(and Bono saying "Bastards were right"), and Lillywhite saying "you need more songs" when he came on board in 2003.

 

[U2DMfan]

bread n whine

go to the album forum (where the album has no name)

we have discussed this on about 50 threads full of hundreds of replies many of them as long or longer and as detalied or much more detailed than the ideas you are putting forth.

I am not discouting what you have to say at all, I am saying you might find some interesting things on those threads. We have done this ad nauseum for months. You aren't going to get much new out of people, I think we had some really good discussions.

Don't feel like talking about it much more, unless you want to drag back up one of those old threads. There may even be a few on the Everything You Know Is Wrong Forum.

I have been busy building a monument to Kate Hudsons ass.